Wikiwand AI

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 September 8

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

September 8

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on September 8, 2025.

List of mnivores

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was Speedy delete per WP:CSD#G6 as an unambiguous error. The page was at this title for 1 minute before being moved to the intended title. Additionally Graeme Bartlett's comment is probably sufficient for G7 speedy deletion too. Thryduulf (talk) 01:24, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

Delete this implausible typo. Thepharoah17 (talk) 23:28, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

  • It was a wrong title which I moved to a correct one 15 years ago, so it is now a long standing redirect. But I would not care if it was deleted. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:32, 8 September 2025 (UTC)
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Minnestoa counties

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. Rusalkii (talk) 22:42, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

Unlikely misspelling. Cyber the tiger🐯 (talk) 20:46, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Minnestoa

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. Rusalkii (talk) 20:44, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

Unlikely misspelling Cyber the tiger🐯 (talk) 20:44, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

  • Delete per nom. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 21:15, 8 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete: very likely misspelling, as shown by both pageviews and the number of redirects whose titles include "Minnestoa", but that is its pitfall as it obstructs search. J947 ‡ edits 23:24, 8 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete per above --Lenticel (talk) 00:14, 9 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete per above. --Schützenpanzer (Talk) 19:19, 9 September 2025 (UTC)
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Indian Hill (Minnestoa)

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. Rusalkii (talk) 20:45, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

Unliklely misspelling. Cyber the tiger🐯 (talk) 20:42, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Tilt coaster

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was no consensus. Neither the nom nor sole commenter seem to have a strong opinion here. Rusalkii (talk) 20:46, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

Only mentioned in passing at the target. This probably could be an article on its own, and I cannot find a good target for it, so deletion might be the best option Casablanca 🪨(T) 17:58, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 18:11, 1 September 2025 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 20:41, 8 September 2025 (UTC)
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Decarlos Brown Jr.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was keep. This was heading for a 'keep' result anyway, but Talk:Killing of Iryna Zarutska#RFC on name inclusion has just been closed as 'include'. He's now named in the article which renders this question moot. -- Tavix (talk) 15:54, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

name of suspect, BLPCRIME TurboSuperA+[talk] 20:39, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

  • Admin bundle note, I am adding the just created Decarlos Brown as both should be discussed and handled together as the same merit applies to both. I am neutral with regard to the outcome. Star Mississippi 15:46, 12 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Keep. Redirects are not deleted in these cases, even if they are not mentioned in the target article. In addition, it is a logical search target; his name is consistently mentioned in news articles about the killing, and as coverage moves from covering the killing to covering the legal proceedings, his name will become the primary name associated with the event. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 20:53, 8 September 2025 (UTC)
    • This discussion is especially inappropriate as there is an ongoing discussion about re-adding his name to the article, where it was for most of the article's history. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 20:59, 8 September 2025 (UTC)
      there is an ongoing discussion about re-adding his name to the article
      That's putting the cart before the horse, isn't it? Until there's a consensus on the talk page, including the name is a violation of BLPCRIME. TurboSuperA+[talk] 21:22, 8 September 2025 (UTC)
      When you say ongoing discussion i hope you aren't counting the messages where people decry bias and censorship Trade (talk) 21:31, 8 September 2025 (UTC)
      • TurboSuperA+: No, it isn't; even if his name isn't listed for whatever reason, a redirect is still appropriate (and not prohibited by that policy). Seeing how removal of the name is automatic but requires a discussion to re-add, but that is not the case with redirects, this discussion should not have been started until after the Talk: discussion concluded; after all, if that discussion concludes that his name should be added, then this discussion would be rather silly. Trade: What a bizarre claim to make: I refer to the discussion I started and in which you commented. In addition, after I made my comment here, another discussion was started to add the alleged perpetrator's name back to the article, in which you have also commented. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 21:52, 8 September 2025 (UTC)
        this discussion should not have been started until after the Talk: discussion concluded
        By that same logic, the redirect shouldn't have been made until the discussion concluded. Leaving the redirect because the consensus in the future might be to include the name is WP:CRYSTALBALL. TurboSuperA+[talk] 21:56, 8 September 2025 (UTC)
        • Both of your statements are wrong. The redirect was created while his name was still included in the article, and the existence of a redirect is non dependent on whether a challenge has been made to the inclusion of the name on the target page. It's also not the same logic, as that policy applies only to "material" in "any article" and not redirects. As for the other policy, it is entirely orthogonal—Wikipedia doesn't predict future events, so we shouldn't guess in the content of articles. But that has no relation to this dispute, which involves a Talk: discussion about a different policy. And my point doesn't even resolve around the conclusion of that discussion, predicted or otherwise: just that this discussion is inappropriate while that discussion is ongoing. The reasoning for that is because whatever the result of that discussion is will be very important for this discussion, particularly if the discussion concludes that the name should be included. If this was a normal article, his name would remain there during the pendency of the discussion; it is only because of the strange policy choice that re-adding information requires a discussion, but removing information doesn't, that his name is currently not stated on the page. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 22:40, 8 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete. Not a public figure or notable. Ryuudou (talk) 22:49, 8 September 2025 (UTC)
The event of the murder is significantly notable. Hence, the article. But not under the current title, of course. -The Gnome (talk)
  • Keep as the name is already widely published in relation to this topic / story. Note: I disagree with the BLPCRIME statement, so I would not be applying it here. As long as it is clear that the person is not yet convicted, then having a mention as a suspect should be permitted. I am suspecting a systematic bias in Wikipedia in not reporting the facts as reported, but instead censoring some of them. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:49, 8 September 2025 (UTC)
    "I am suspecting a systematic bias in Wikipedia in not reporting the facts as reported, but instead censoring some of them" Please assume good faith from the other editors Trade (talk) 12:47, 10 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Murder of Iryna Zarutska is the trivially appropriate title for the article, with a Redirect to it from "Decarlos Brown Jr." Every article about such a subject is titled like that. "Killing of" is acceptable, of course, but not the usual pattern. One could list fifty such articles without breaking sweat. -The Gnome (talk) 10:22, 9 September 2025 (UTC)
    "Killing of X" is how we normally title articles before conviction, for example Killing of Brian Thompson. voorts (talk/contributions) 01:06, 11 September 2025 (UTC)
    Including the name of Luigi Mangione was not controversial Marat175 (talk) 12:43, 11 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Keep. Redirects aid navigation and searches. The suspect’s name is widely reported in reliable sources, so readers will search for it. A redirect is a navigational aid, not an assertion in an article. WP:BLPCRIME governs article content; a redirect alone does not assert guilt. Disconnected Phrases (talk) 16:43, 10 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Keep – At least for now. Svartner (talk) 19:49, 10 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Keep as long as he is mentioned as a suspect or greater. Metallurgist (talk) 00:09, 11 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Keep BLPCRIME is about article content, not redirects. This is a valid search term. voorts (talk/contributions) 01:06, 11 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Keep. Many readers will be searching for the suspect rather than the victim. We don't have to wait for the article's RfC to run its course before deciding whether or not to keep this redirect. Rjjiii (talk) 02:45, 11 September 2025 (UTC)
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Wolowitz

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was retarget to Howard Wolowitz. (non-admin closure) Left guide (talk) 19:34, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

Retarget to Howard Wolowitz? 𝚈𝚘𝚟𝚝 (𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔𝚟𝚝) 18:42, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

  • Retarget to Howard Wolowitz. It is incredibly unfortunate that WikiNav is not working for this because I'd like to see how many outgoing pageviews versus total pageviews there are. Regardless, this makes sense as a retarget because the current target does not mention Wolowitz, which is the German rendition of this village's name, per my research. Casablanca 🪨(T) 19:28, 8 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Retarget to Howard Wolowitz with a hatnote back to the current target per Casablanca Rock. J947 ‡ edits 23:21, 8 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Retarget to Howard Wolowitz as village with 1334 people is not the primary topic for this. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:57, 12 September 2025 (UTC)
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Flashpoint (upcoming film)

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. Rusalkii (talk) 20:36, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

Delete per WP:UFILM. Target subject released over 2 years ago. Steel1943 (talk) 16:28, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

  • Delete per nom. — Trailblazer101🔥 (discuss · contribs) 16:49, 8 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 16:55, 8 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom --Lenticel (talk) 00:14, 9 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete far more importantly than when the film was released, the redirect is not longer getting used (23 hits so far this year, 2 in the whole of last year). Thryduulf (talk) 01:28, 9 September 2025 (UTC)
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

The Wonderful Wizard of Oz (upcoming film)

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. Rusalkii (talk) 20:37, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

Not mentioned in target article. The only plausible target I could find to target this redirect is Wicked: For Good, but I do not believe that to be a proper target. Steel1943 (talk) 16:22, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Facebook.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was no consensus. Jay 💬 05:43, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

Delete. Per WP:UNNATURAL. ArthananWarcraft (talk) 15:14, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

  • Keep, it's harmless. -- Tavix (talk) 15:28, 8 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete, there is a general consensus that redirects with an unnecesessary period at the end should be deleted. Mr slav999 (talk) 15:53, 8 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete. Per nom. Steel1943 (talk) 16:24, 8 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 17:06, 8 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete unnecessary period and we're already here. --Schützenpanzer (Talk) 21:28, 8 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Keep: very high pageviews; deletion will inconvenience 2,000 readers a year. J947 ‡ edits 23:17, 8 September 2025 (UTC)
    2000 readers a year: It only got 524 pageviews in 2023 and only 284 in 2024. ArthananWarcraft (talk) 06:53, 9 September 2025 (UTC)
    I'm used to dividing the all-time figure by 6 rather than 10... Still very healthy pageviews – from clicking Special:Random a few times, 284 appears to be about half of the median article's pageviews last year. We don't delete articles on species of moth for being badly used. J947 ‡ edits 22:11, 10 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Keep per J947. While most redirects with trailing punctuation bring no benefits to the encyclopaedia, this one is very clearly an exception to that general rule. Thryduulf (talk) 01:38, 9 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete It is not a real inconvenience, the search page for "Facebook." provides facebook as the first result. Raync (talk) 06:47, 10 September 2025 (UTC)
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Juno Averna

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 September 15#Juno Averna

Septemeber 11 attacks in comics

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 14:32, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

Not a plausible typo. Note that the page Septemeber doesn't exist. Search technology is sufficiently advanced not to need this page. C679 12:56, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

  • Delete, implausible typo. Suonii180 (talk) 20:06, 8 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom --Lenticel (talk) 00:15, 9 September 2025 (UTC)
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

ABCDEF

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was no consensus. No consensus, which functionally defaults to the non-delete option of disambiguate. Relisting for a third time will likely serve no purpose. (non-admin closure) Vanderwaalforces (talk) 14:25, 17 September 2025 (UTC)

The Gayle song doesn't seem to be the right target since this can refer to many alphabets using Latin script (this was originally targeted there) and there is also a dabpage titled ABCDEFG. ArthananWarcraft (talk) 12:10, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

  • Comment ABC, ABCD and ABCDEFG are dab pages, ABCDE is a redlink but was previously an article about a software programme that was deleted at AfD. This title was created as a redirect to Latin script in April 2024 but retargetted to the present target about 12 hours later. Previously (2017) this was what appears to have been a straight-up copy of the then-current revision of the Alphabet article that was speedily deleted under A10. Thryduulf (talk) 13:46, 24 August 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. voorts (talk/contributions) 22:59, 24 August 2025 (UTC)
  • Also worth pointing out that Abcdef has been salted since 2010. * Pppery * it has begun... 02:00, 25 August 2025 (UTC)
  • Disambiguate. Comparable to ABCDEFG, but that one has more possible targets. Here we can add ABC (medicine)#ABCDEF, and perhaps the " American Boys' Club for the Defense of Errol Flynn" (mentioned in [[Errol Flynn). Deleting certainly serves no one. Fram (talk) 07:53, 25 August 2025 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 18:57, 31 August 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete The clean version of the Gayle song was shortened to "ABC", not "ABCDEF"; unlikely search term. 162 etc. (talk) 22:55, 3 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Disambiguate. Page drafted. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 19:48, 5 September 2025 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 11:03, 8 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Weak DABify per Fram and Shhhnotsoloud. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 17:25, 8 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Disambiguate per all. Jay 💬 14:23, 17 September 2025 (UTC)
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Achievement points

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was retarget to Achievement (video games). Rusalkii (talk) 20:42, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

Concept exists in many other gaming-related contexts, as an on-wiki search shows. I am not sure whether retargeting to Experience point would be accurate since I am unfamiliar with the subject. 1234qwer1234qwer4 03:04, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

Redirect to Achievement (video games). Gonnym (talk) 08:02, 25 August 2025 (UTC)
+1 to re-target to generic article. –xenotalk 13:36, 29 August 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete While points are mentioned sparingly in the achievement article, it doesn't seem like a major aspect. Delete as overly vague and unhelpful. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 04:08, 26 August 2025 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 05:54, 1 September 2025 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 11:00, 8 September 2025 (UTC)
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

South Korea and Japan

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 September 16#South Korea and Japan

Wolfe Island (disambiguation)

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 September 16#Wolfe Island (disambiguation)

2028 NFL draft

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 14:30, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

Not mentioned at target and it is honestly just too soon, even for a redirect. Servite et contribuere (talk) 10:08, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

  • Agree Assadzadeh (talk) 09:52, 9 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete not mentioned + WP:RFD#DELETE #10 Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 15:10, 9 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete: Misleading based on there being no relevant information at the target, making it an unhelpful search term. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:54, 9 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete no specific 2028 information there (because the draft is ~2.5 years away), so no need for a redirect. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:59, 12 September 2025 (UTC)
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

2025–26 Angers SCO season

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete all except two that have since been converted into articles. ✗plicit 14:29, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

Delete all blank redirect articles. This is a direct follow-up to my nominations for current Bundesliga club season articles yesterday. Mathew D'Marco created these articles between March and May with no content beyond the title, seemingly to gain credit for creation rather than to contribute substance. Four to six months later, they remain blank and dormant. During this same period, Mathew created numerous other football-related articles that only became viable once other editors invested time into building them out—further highlighting the pattern. Leaving these empty shells in place discourages constructive contributions; deletion would return them to redlinks, inviting editors who are genuinely willing to develop proper content. It’s also worth noting that Mathew D'Marco has been contacted multiple times—by myself and others—regarding this behavior, both on their talk page and the WikiProject Football talk page, but has never responded. Rupert1904 (talk) 09:24, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

  • Comment: See Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 September 7#2025–26 SC Freiburg season. May need to relist both and merge. Steel1943 (talk) 19:51, 8 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. Qby (talk) 07:54, 9 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete all per nom Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 15:09, 9 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete all apart from 2025–26 Ghana Premier League, which has been converted to an article. If there are any that have specific season information in the target article, then those could be kept too, but on a look through a random few of them, this doesn't look to be the case. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:37, 10 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Keep - these redirects all mostly seem to be well linked, and are for articles that almost entirely be created within the next few months. And bog-standard. One even begins in about 6 weeks time! I don't see what's to be gained here. No prejudice against relisting them seperately. Nfitz (talk) 00:41, 11 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Not mentioned at target is a valid reason for deleting redirects. None of these have any season specific information at target, so red links are better. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:00, 12 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete (the ones not converted) per nom and discussion(s). Kante4 (talk) 09:16, 11 September 2025 (UTC)
Delete Per WP:RETURNTORED Servite et contribuere (talk) 03:57, 13 September 2025 (UTC)
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

24 Oras Central Visayas

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the redirect's undeletion. Rusalkii (talk) 20:48, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

Former 24 Oras brand Regional Newscast in Central Visayas's mentioned at several other pages, including DYSS-TV. A redirect was created for this person when the outcome of the article was moved back to it's original name called Balitang Bisdak when created as redirect in late-January 2016 by a now-permablocked user for suspected sockpuppetry. Delete for now as per WP:REDLINK. 49.151.187.185 talk to IP49! contributions to IP49! 08:13, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Caesar Barber

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 September 15#Caesar Barber

Would you like fries with that

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 September 15#Would you like fries with that

Frycook

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was retarget to Fry cook which now contains the Wiktionary soft redirect. (non-admin closure) Left guide (talk) 06:51, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

Delete was personal essay. No use in typo. And no really suitable target. Thepharoah17 (talk) 05:48, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

  • Retarget to Fry cook if that is (as I have recommended) soft redirected to Wiktionary. Thryduulf (talk) 10:33, 8 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Soft redirect per Thryduulf. Thepharoah17 (talk) 08:37, 14 September 2025 (UTC)
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Fry cook.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. Jay 💬 10:01, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

Delete. Delete. Delete. Thepharoah17 (talk) 05:44, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

  • Delete The full stop and the end makes it an unlikely search. Servite et contribuere (talk) 10:10, 8 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete. ArthananWarcraft (talk) 13:24, 8 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete due to unnecessary period. --Schützenpanzer (Talk) 15:04, 8 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete as unlikely search term --Lenticel (talk) 00:17, 9 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete. Steel1943 (talk) 16:42, 9 September 2025 (UTC)
  • delete, and am i missing something with those links? consarn (grave) (obituary) 00:44, 10 September 2025 (UTC)
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Aerodynamic cavitation

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the redirect's undeletion. Rusalkii (talk) 20:49, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

Delete as there is no such thing. It is a self-contradictory concept, as cavitation can by definition only occur in a liquid, and is therefore misleading. Section targeted has already been deleted for the same reason. There is one google hit, which is unreliable as a source. The term appears to have been coined by a person unfamiliar with English language hydrodynamics terminology who made it up to refer to boundary layer separation or vortex generation, both well known and properly defined physical phenomena It should also not be retargeted to either of these as it is not correct and will mislead the reader. · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 04:18, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

  • Information Note: I’ve fixed the nomination and notified the target of this RFD. Thepharoah17 (talk) 05:24, 8 September 2025 (UTC)
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Ifugao River

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. Rusalkii (talk) 20:52, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

This was formerly a stub, but was redirected to Ifugao by Ost316 last 2020, only that this river does not pass through that province, but rather on Benguet and La Union on the other side of the drainage divide. The river may pass WP:NGEO, but I have no ability to create an article right now. Howard the Duck (talk) 15:54, 23 August 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the page history?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:12, 31 August 2025 (UTC)
  • delete, potentially as a train wreck. single sentence that could've been a shortdesc, unsourced, said nothing about the river itself, doesn't refer to any specific river, and doesn't seem to have any single river it could refer to. it also has a really unhelpful incoming link in the list of rivers of the philippines consarn (grave) (obituary) 14:37, 1 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete for now per WP:REDLINK --Lenticel (talk) 10:58, 2 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Multiple article say that it is also called Aringay River, and information for that is available at Aringay § Geography. It is not clear if the Ifugao River is called the Aringay River, or the other way round, only when it flows through some stretches. Jay 💬 04:32, 7 September 2025 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: In response to Jay, do folks think there'd be any merit in re-targeting to Aringay#Geography?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 01:14, 8 September 2025 (UTC)
Delete Per WP:RETURNTORED Servite et contribuere (talk) 04:00, 13 September 2025 (UTC)
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Draft:Voepass 2283

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was keep. Consensus was made clear after the relist. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 11:22, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

Draft page that has been moved to a new redirect page "Voepass 2283" and nobody would use a Draft: prefix to redirect, right? Pнp13333332 tαlk\edıts 16:38, 31 August 2025 (UTC)

  • Keep per WP:RDRAFT. The fact that a different title was ultimately used is not relevant. ✗plicit 23:33, 7 September 2025 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 01:07, 8 September 2025 (UTC)
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Related Articles

Timelines

Top Qs

Fact Checks